Buffalo’s “High-Line“ Competition: Reimagining the DL&W Corridor
Image: courtesy- WNYLC
Sponsor: Western New York Land Conservancy Type: Open, International, one-stage, ideas Eligibility: Professionals, students, teams Fee: none Language: English Timetable: 11 January 2018 – Q&A period ends 10 February 2018 – Registration deadline 15 February 2018 – Submission deadline Jury: • Charles Davis II, Assistant Professor of Architectural History and Criticism, University at Buffalo • Ken Greenberg, Principal of Greenberg Consultants/author of Walking Home – the life and lessons of a city builder • Sara Heidinger, President of the Old First Ward Community Association/co-owner Undergrounds Coffee House & Roastery • Chris Reed, Founding Director of Stoss Landscape Urbanism/Professor at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design • Robert Shibley, Professor and Dean of the University at Buffalo School of Architecture and Planning/UB Campus Architect/Senior Fellow at the UB Regional Institute • Janne Sirén, Director of the Albright-Knox Art Gallery • Ana Traverso-Krejcarek, Manager of the High Line Network, at Friends of the High Line
Awards: First Place: $7,500 Second Place: $3,000 Third Place: $1,000
Community Choice Award: $3,000
Proposals should:
Align with the 2018 community vision plan’s guiding principles and strategies (available at wnylc.org/dlw and from the Supporting Materials and Data website);
Incorporate inspirational, innovative and inclusive urban design that is practical and achievable. An initial cost estimate for the construction of the trail and greenway is approximately $21 million;
Enhance natural wildlife habitats and use native plants; Consider connections and amenities;
Ensure connections to adjacent parks, trails and the waterfront as well as possible features and amenities within the context of the surrounding geography and land use;
Consider locations of trail and greenway entrances and access implications on existing communities and amenities, including both primary and secondary entrances to the corridor;
Explore the potential for additional recreational amenities adjacent to the corridor:
Incorporate comfort stations and respite areas along the corridor that provide, for example, restrooms and nursing stations.
Promote access for multiple users and uses:
Accommodate the potential for future consideration of light rail along the corridor, with particular attention to the western most section of the corridor between the DL&W terminal and Louisiana Street.
Strive for universal access.
Consider year-round uses and access, including winter uses in a cold-weather climate.
Design each area to fit the context of the surrounding neighborhoods and consider several of the key features in the four different sections of the corridor described on the following pages.
If cities in the U.S. are anticipating funding from government entities to solve a dire need for affordable housing, they should be prepared for a long wait. The national government, a traditional source of funds for such projects, has shown little if no interest in the issue, and state and local sources are at a minimum. To exacerbate the problem, the construction cost of affordable housing has risen exponentially the the past few decades. Gone are those days when architects such as Oakland-based Michael Pyatok could build affordable housing for $100 a square foot.
Form and Dichroic Light Scott Hall at Carnegie Mellon University Michelle LaFoe and Isaac Campbell OFFICE 52 Architecture Forward by Cesar Pelli, FAIA Introduction by Michael J. Crosbie, FAIA Leete”s Island Books, Maine USA Hard cover; 96 pages in color ISBN 9780918172709
In his introduction to Form and Dichroic LIght, Michael Crosbie never mentions the term, “wild card,” to describe Office 52’s participation in the invited competition for the Carnegie Mellon Engineering Building. The four finalists, picked from a list of 17 firms, also included three household names: ZGF, Wilson, and BCJ (Bohlin Cywinski, Jackson). So what possible chance could a firm, which had just recently opened a small office in Portland, Oregon, have against a competition lineup of this magnitude? But as OFFICE 52 Principal, Isaac Campbell explained, as a small firm, “we were quite nimble,” and the $50,000 stipend the firms all received to produce a design could allow OFFICE 52 more time to undertake the research involved than might be the case with a larger office, where a cost controller is constantly focusing on the operation.
The Rails to Trails program, which gained momentum after the1984 Federal Land Banking Law—supported by the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy—has seen over 24,000 miles of trails established where rail lines once existed. Some sites were strictly urban, while others, sometimes over 100 miles in length, were primarily rural, while others combined some of both.
The reunification of Germany in 1989 not only had a great impact on the lives of many Germans, especially those living in the former DDR,but together with the decision to move the nation’s capital from Bonn to Berlin resulted in two major international design competitions in 1992: the first was to convert the existing Reichstag building into a home for the German parliament, the second being the Spreebogen planning competition, which included a chancellery for the head of state as well as needed buildings nearby for the Federal government.
The renovation of Miremont-le-Cret n 2012 was unusual in that the project was the subject of a competition. This building had long been landmarked as one of Geneva’s most significant modern accomplishments, designed in 1953 by a local architect, Marc-Joseph Saugey. The building’s design is remarkable in how it fits into a somewhat narrow, elongated site, but solving the issue of monotony that could naturally arise, had the facades not consisted of a simple elevation with no protruding edges. Instead Saugey came up with the idea of a faceted treatment of the facade on both sides of the structure, thus eliminating any notion of boredom on the part of a casual visitor.
IMPORTANT NOTICE : Unless otherwise indicated, photographs of buildings and
projects are from professional or institutional archives. All reproduction is prohibited
unless authorized by the architects, designers, office managers, consortia or archives
centers concerned. The Competition Project, Inc. is not held responsible for any
omissions or inaccuracies, but appreciate all comments and pertinent information that
will permit necessary modifications during future updates.
